According to the Flouride Action Network, municipalities around the country are adding industrial-grade fluoride to our drinking water instead of pharmaceutical-grade fluoride. The industrial stuff contains enough arsenic to make us sick, and is costing us billions in extra health costs each year.

Industrial-grade fluoride chemicals added to US public water supplies contain arsenic that the EPA classifies as a human carcinogen. Switching to low-arsenic pharmaceutical-grade fluoride will save society $1 billion to $14 billion annually, according to research published in Environmental Science & Policy, led by former EPA senior scientists who are experts in chemical risk assessment, reports the Fluoride Action Network (FAN).

Although never studied for safety or efficacy, hydrofluorosilicic acid (HFSA) is added to public water supplies as a purported cavity preventive. The industry-funded group that regulates water additives, NSF International, allows several toxins in HFSA, including arsenic.

The Safe Drinking Water Act requires EPA to determine the level of certain contaminants in drinking water at which no adverse health effects are likely to occur. These health goals, based solely on possible health risks and exposure over a lifetime with an adequate margin of safety, are called maximum contaminant level goals (MCLG). The MCLG for arsenic is zero. The EPA also sets an enforceable maximum contaminant level (MCL), but concedes this level will not prevent cancers.

Senior researchers, Drs. William Hirzy and Robert Carton , write, “Arsenic levels in this HFSA product vary substantially but are typically about 30-35 mg/kg.” These levels would qualify it as toxic hazardous waste if not for a legal loophole because it is sold to fluoridate water. The study found HFSA raised the arsenic level of finished or tap water by anywhere from 0.078 to 0.43 parts per billion (ppb).

Ninety percent of arsenic showing up in tap water comes from fluoridation chemicals, according to a study in the American Water Works Association publication, Opflow, led by Dr. Cheng-nan Weng.

Hirzy and Carton found that industrial-grade HFSA contains from 100 to 500 times more arsenic than pharmaceutical grade sodium fluoride (NaF).

Using EPA’s calculation methods, HFSA would cause from 320 to 1800 arsenic-induced cancers per year. They calculated these cancers would cost society $1 billion to $6 billion per year.*

The researchers conclude: “Our analysis shows that, if local governments that currently add HFSA to their drinking water wish to continue delivering fluoride to their citizens and at the same time reduce the number of lung and bladder cancers among their citizens, they could do so with a significant net benefit to society by switching to USP NaF [pharmaceutical grade Sodium Fluoride] for fluoridation.”

The researchers write in the “Results” section,
“…the realistic net annual social cost savings by using NaF is shown to range from about $1 billion (Case 1) to about $6 billion (Case 4) as shown in Table 3

We show in the Supplementary Material that with As levels that would pass the NFS/ANSI Standard 60, i.e. 380 ppm As, the savings could be as great as $14 billion/year…”

Subscribe

Comments (10)

Better yet, eliminate fluoride completely. 98% of water fluoridation worldwide is carried out in North America. Most European countries consider mandatory mass-medication via water to be unnecessary and unethical. In addition to numerous health concerns it is now proven to lower IQ levels.

Of course this toxic waste fluoride contains many heavy metals and other contaminants.
See what Utah found in it.
The state of Utah had no idea what exactly was being dumped into its water supply along with the fluoridation chemicals, but it discovered it was getting way more than it had bargained for.
The fluoridation companies came under intense scrutiny after Utah’s analysis of various spills and releases of the fluoridation chemicals revealed that in addition to fluoride, there were several other “tramp” chemicals far in excess of allowable limits for safe drinking water – chemicals that included aluminum, arsenic, lead, mercury and berillium which, when mixed with fluoride, become especially active and dangerous to human health.http://www.dmlawfirm.com/utah-halts-fluoridation

Why is every focusing on fluoridation when there are other chemicals used in water that are “cancer-causing” like fluoride? Just too many people have lost sight of the overwhelming numbers of medical professionals that have supported fluoridation. Thousands of children have benefited from it and a lot more will still benefit from it.

While I agree that fluoride could become toxic, so is chloride used for disinfection. Disinfection Byproducts (DBPs) are well documented that they are potentially “cancer-causing” chemicals but no one can deny that chlorine disinfection has helped to kill bacteria in drinking water and prevented a lot of health problems. Free chloride in disinfected water is bad for most people with immune deficiencies. Should we also ban chlorination?

So, why is there no cry or protest to ban chlorination. Is North America the only part of the world where chlorine disinfection is practiced?

My point is both fluoride and chlorine do a lot of health good if proper doses are used. Remember water is also dangerous if drank improperly.

Chlorine is used to treat the water, to make it safe to drink. Fluoride is used to treat the body. Do you see the difference?
It is the only drug in existence forced on so many people, but which has never been approved by the FDA.
It is ineffective for teeth as we can tell by so many states, long fluoridated, but which are having dental crises for children.
For adults it is slow poison, causing cancer, arthritis, thyroid disease, brittle bones and much more.

I’m with Patricia! The only entities that benefits from this practice are the chemical companies that make millions selling it and the government reps they bribe. If I want to use fluoride on my teeth I’ll buy fluoride toothpaste.

Chlorination has done a lot of good, yet it’s Byproducts are dangerous. I don’t have anything against chlorination and I have no issue with fluoridation. I love to see the Fluoride Action Network organize a Chloride Action Network, then I will know they are fighting justly.

Ultimately these two chemicals are used in water to prevent diseases in children and adults. If used properly, they are good for us.

While I can tell the level of scientific understanding of what fluoride does to the body is mostly of opinion and is shown in your responses… I cannot stress it enough that fluoride is only one small toxin in our water. Here is one to search… Hexavalent Chromium… quite fun huh? Stop reading the news, turn off your TV and educate yourself. We don’t need followers, we need leaders that act. What purpose are you going to serve if all you do is consume and never give back? The balance has been shattered and you have the least of clues until you change.

This is a false comparison.
1. Chlorination is used to prevent lethal diseases, and probably saves millions of people every year (untreated water kills about 1.8 million people per year). Fluoridation is not used to save lives, and might kill hundreds of people per year.
2. Chlorination is to disinfect the water, whereas fluoridation is using the water supply to deliver medicine. This is a clear violation of medical ethics.
3. Chlorine can be easily filtered out with normal water filters, whereas removing fluoride requires specialist equipment.

People, read the EVIDENCE-BASED research. It’s funny how a news reporter or mother will state that fluoride caused them to get cancer, what about the evidence that the CDC has done — the source that actually does the research??? Fluoride has been heavily regulated to get the appropriate/non-toxic amounts. And yes, it does prevent cavities in adults and children.